Could sink them in a back-country swamp, in northern Canada. For a fee.

I don't know if that answer was meant to be facetious or not, but the one advantage (if you really want to consider it as such) that Canada has over the US in this regard is that private companies and government can find a secluded spot to do just about anything without pissing off locals and conservation groups; it's just so damn big. Here in the US, just about every "secluded" spot is in someone's backyard or next to a favored recreational area (with some exceptions out west).

Question for the legal minds,
Since the tailing transport plan didn't seem to work, what's to prevent NL or IoPac (sorry IP is for International Paper, lets not defile it) from using the old mine site for a scrap processing yard?
Seems they're quite happy to flood the line with as many DOT111's as can fit, so what if they said in the future - there are too many of they to move them out, we need to cut them up and ship them out?

Move over, Martin Shkreli. You, too, Heather Bresch. Gouging sick people and kids with allergies is small-time stuff. If you want to see some truly impressive corporate greed at work, watch Ed Ellis.

He’s holding the Adirondack Park hostage.

Mr. Ellis, president of Iowa Pacific Holdings, has decided the largest park in the lower 48 states, a six million-acre expanse with vast tracts of constitutionally protected forever-wild forests is a great spot for parking old oil tankers. The company, which invested $1.5 million to acquire and upgrade the Saratoga and North Creek rail line in 2011, says there’s enough room on a 30-mile-long section of track it owns to park 2,500 rail cars. It’s already started storing afew dozen, hundreds more are on the way, and more will be coming unless, he says, someone wants to pay to stop it.

If this were a movie, surely this would be the part where a wiseguy out of central casting says, “Nice preserve you got here. Be a shame if anything

“This is America,” he declares. “If someone has a property right to do something, and someone doesn’t want them to do it, they can always try to buy it.”

The original plan was to use the rail line to transport granite from the former Tahawus mine to New York City, but that project hasn’t materialized. So instead, Mr. Ellis says, he’ll use the tracks to store oil tankers — unless the government pays him not to.

Mr. Ellis, of course, doesn’t call this extortion, but “an opportunity.” And taxpayers, he says, can buy into that opportunity by “investing in the line, and by funding the investment we have already made.” In other words, this champion of capitalism proposes to have the public foot the bill for his poor investment, or face having a national treasure turned into a junk yard.

We thought we’d seen as out-of-control an executive as one could imagine in Mr. Shkreli, who drew national rebuke in 2015 when he jacked up the price of an antiparasitic drug used by HIV patients from $13.50 to $750. We thought we’d see as hard-hearted a CEO as you could find in Ms. Bresch, who raised the cost of EpiPens used in tens of thousands of schools to counteract dangerous, even deadly allergic reactions — from about $100 a pair to more than $600. Mr. Ellis seems determined to do for the rail industry’s image what they did for pharmaceuticals.

In this case, the advocacy group Protect the Adirondacks suggests there may be multiple legal grounds, from environmental violations to an unauthorized change of use, for the state to stop this abuse. We urge Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to explore and if possible bring the full weight of the law to bear on a company whose behavior, in another era, would have gotten it run out of town on a rail of a different sort.

But in my opinion, this comes under the heading of "over the top frothing at the mouth hatred."

Sure, the rail cars are ugly, and no one wants to see them. And yes, Iowa Pacific is pushy and rude in their "pay us not to do this" approach. But this does NOT rise to the level of denying life saving medication to patients. Trying to make that equivalency just makes the TU look stupid and hateful. I was surprised not to see Hitler, or Satan, mentioned in the piece.

When I see these kinds of responses, I wonder about the narrative that is being driven. I am not sure it has anything to do with not wanting to see the railcars, or with keeping the scenery pretty. I think it has more to do with trying to force private landholders and businesses to do the will of activists groups, and if anyone resists, demonizing them as much as possible.

Is it an eyesore? Sure. Is it illegal? Now that's the key question, isn't it?

If the rights they purchased didn't forbid using the tracks for storing railcars then they've simply exploited this omission. Kind of like having tenants who rent their apartment out on AirBNB. If you don't want them to do that, and there are no local laws forbidding it, then you better state it in the rental contract.

The original plan to transport granite hasn't panned out so they found another way to make money by using the tracks as a parking lot. Perhaps the only legal recourse is if the rights include fulfilling some obligation that they haven't met ... like transporting the granite.

The "pay us to stop doing that" is playing hardball. If they're not legally in breach of anything then paying them for "view improvement" is an option (not a welcome one but there it is). Kind of like your tenant asking to be paid to stop renting out on AirBNB!

All I see is someone who figured out how to make a buck in a way that the state didn't foresee. They've capitalized on a loophole that will likely be closed in future dealings with the state.

\All I see is someone who figured out how to make a buck in a way that the state didn't foresee. They've capitalized on a loophole that will likely be closed in future dealings with the state.

I think if you were take more time to look into it this you'll find that the Iowa Pacific Holdings is claiming the rail right of way is under federal jurisdiction not NY State jurisdiction. This dates from the eminent domain take over by the US Government during WWII which was extended on or about 1962 for another century more or less. Anyway that's part of my 30,000 foot summary.

It is a little more complicated than NY State not evaluating all foreseeable contingencies. A legal question that the City of Chicago is also grapping with (see my earlier post in this thread).

Protect may have a case if Iowa Pacific accepts so many cars for storage that they have to block the main line. They are close to that limit now. The forest preserve was taken by the Feds for the purpose of moving ore, not storing cars. That fact maybe could (I said "maybe") give Protect some standing to bring legal action to stop the car storage.

If the storage has to halt at maybe 200 cars, then that is far fewer cars than the 2000+ threatened by Iowa Pacific, and consequently not all that much revenue.

We just have to hope that If Iowa Pacific goes bankrupt (which they just might do given their other failures), that these stored cars are removed.

__________________
Every time that wheel turns round, bound to measure just a little more ground.

Please pardon my inquiry on the spray paint again...
I'm just curious if there is any possible environmental impact as these cars sit & rot & are exposed to the elements for a long period of time, and suddenly the gang graffiti (or artwork) on the outsides of these tankers begins to breakdown & wash down into the Boreas River & the other watersheds... Is the paint on the outside of these tankers really environmentally ok? Or am I just being a little too worried about a non issue?

Well there is a lot more of it in the city; probably 10^4 times as much. And I have not heard that cited as an issue for city storm drain water. But who knows? I think residue in the cars is a lot more of a potential issue than the graffiti. But as I stated earlier, I have not read where anyone has had an objective look at whether the cars are really clean inside or not. Of course, IP screams that the cars are clean; and the various activists scream that the cars are contaminated. But I have not seen any objective facts on that, so it's just the sound of dogs barking to me.

... I have not read where anyone has had an objective look at whether the cars are really clean inside or not. Of course, IP screams that the cars are clean; and the various activists scream that the cars are contaminated. .

So any possible contaminants painted on the outside of these tankers is a non issue...?

DISCLAIMER:
Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk.
Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by
the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions
found in the FULL
DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use
of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of
this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.